Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

readOnlyHint=true already tells the agent this is a safe read. The description confirms a GET endpoint, but says nothing about pagination flow, result shape, or ordering despite a next_token/page_size cursor mechanism being present.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two front-loaded sentences: purpose and filters first, endpoint path last. No redundant or filler content.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a six-parameter paginated list tool with no output schema, the description is thin: it does not explain pagination behavior, ordering semantics, or what a returned user record contains. Adequate but with clear gaps.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so all six parameters including sort, roles, permissions, and next_token are documented in the schema. The description only restates the role/permission filter idea, adding no syntax beyond the structured fields.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb (List) and resource (users) scoped to one organization, plus the optional role/permission filters. This implicitly separates it from kinde_list_users and the get_user_* siblings, though it never names an alternative explicitly.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description's 'belonging to one organization' plus optional filters implies when to reach for it, but there is no explicit when-to-use/when-not guidance or pointer to kinde_list_users for environment-wide listing.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.